Short-term treatment with zanamivir to prevent influenza: results of a placebo-controlled study

Treatment and prevention of influenza in geriatric patients

INTRODUCTION

Older adults are the most vulnerable population to the effects of influenza. These patients have age-related characteristics that make response to both infection and therapeutics different than younger patients.

AREAS COVERED

Influenza vaccination and antiviral therapy are the foundational approaches to preventing and treating influenza in geriatric patients. Older adults should receive one of the three enhanced vaccines before influenza season beings. There are five antivirals used in influenza. Geriatric patients have been under-enrolled in antiviral studies but have been included in small numbers. Oseltamivir has the most abundant evidence, including in the hospital and long-term care (LTC) facilities, and the strongest evidence for reducing mortality and complications. Peramivir offers the shortest time for symptom alleviation, while baloxavir is best tolerated.

EXPERT OPINION

Oseltamivir has the most versatility in preventing and treating influenza in geriatric patients. Parenteral peramivir and zanamivir are second-line alternatives for complicated influenza when oseltamivir cannot be used. Single-dose peramivir and baloxavir are attractive alternatives to oseltamivir in uncomplicated influenza but will not increase in utilization until more evidence is available regarding mortality and complications, particularly in hospitalized and LTC patients. More studies, including comparative trials, are required to elucidate the role in therapy for each therapeutic in the geriatric population.

Airborne transmission of respiratory viruses including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has had a wide-ranging and profound impact on how we think about the transmission of respiratory viruses This review outlines the basis on which we should consider all respiratory viruses as aerosol-transmissible infections, in order to improve our control of these pathogens in both healthcare and community settings.

RECENT FINDINGS

We present recent studies to support the aerosol transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, and some older studies to demonstrate the aerosol transmissibility of other, more familiar seasonal respiratory viruses.

SUMMARY

Current knowledge on how these respiratory viruses are transmitted, and the way we control their spread, is changing. We need to embrace these changes to improve the care of patients in hospitals and care homes including others who are vulnerable to severe disease in community settings.

A Review of the Ring Trial Design for Evaluating Ring Interventions for Infectious Diseases

In trials of infectious disease interventions, rare outcomes and unpredictable spatiotemporal variation can introduce bias, reduce statistical power, and prevent conclusive inferences. Spillover effects can complicate inference if individual randomization is used to gain efficiency. Ring trials are a type of cluster-randomized trial that may increase efficiency and minimize bias, particularly in emergency and elimination settings with strong clustering of infection. They can be used to evaluate ring interventions, which are delivered to individuals in proximity to or contact with index cases. We conducted a systematic review of ring trials, compare them with other trial designs for evaluating ring interventions, and describe strengths and weaknesses of each design. Of 849 articles and 322 protocols screened, we identified 26 ring trials, 15 cluster-randomized trials, 5 trials that randomized households or individuals within rings, and 1 individually randomized trial. The most common interventions were postexposure prophylaxis (n = 23) and focal mass drug administration and screening and treatment (n = 7). Ring trials require robust surveillance systems and contact tracing for directly transmitted diseases. For rare diseases with strong spatiotemporal clustering, they may have higher efficiency and internal validity than cluster-randomized designs, in part because they ensure that no clusters are excluded from analysis due to zero cluster incidence. Though more research is needed to compare them with other types of trials, ring trials hold promise as a design that can increase trial speed and efficiency while reducing bias.

Efficacy and mechanism of actions of natural antimicrobial drugs

Microbial infections have significantly increased over the last decades, and the mortality rates remain unacceptably high. The emergence of new resistance patterns and the spread of new viruses challenge the eradication of infectious diseases. The declining efficacy of antimicrobial drugs has become a global public health problem. Natural products derived from natural sources, such as plants, animals, and microorganisms, have significant efficacy for the treatment of infectious diseases accompanied by less adverse effects, synergy, and ability to overcome drug resistance. As the Chinese female scientist Youyou Tu received the Nobel Prize for the antimalarial drug artemisinin, antimicrobial drugs developed from Traditional Chinese Medicine are expected to receive increasing attention again. This review summarizes the antimicrobial agents derived from natural products approved for nearly 20 years and describes their efficacy and mode of action. The aim of this unit is to review the current status of antimicrobial drugs from natural products in order to increase the value of natural products as a source of novel drug candidates for infectious diseases.

Clinical Practice Guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America: 2018 Update on Diagnosis, Treatment, Chemoprophylaxis, and Institutional Outbreak Management of Seasonal Influenzaa

These clinical practice guidelines are an update of the guidelines published by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) in 2009, prior to the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic. This document addresses new information regarding diagnostic testing, treatment and chemoprophylaxis with antiviral medications, and issues related to institutional outbreak management for seasonal influenza. It is intended for use by primary care clinicians, obstetricians, emergency medicine providers, hospitalists, laboratorians, and infectious disease specialists, as well as other clinicians managing patients with suspected or laboratory-confirmed influenza. The guidelines consider the care of children and adults, including special populations such as pregnant and postpartum women and immunocompromised patients.

Clinical Practice Guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America: 2018 Update on Diagnosis, Treatment, Chemoprophylaxis, and Institutional Outbreak Management of Seasonal Influenzaa

These clinical practice guidelines are an update of the guidelines published by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) in 2009, prior to the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic. This document addresses new information regarding diagnostic testing, treatment and chemoprophylaxis with antiviral medications, and issues related to institutional outbreak management for seasonal influenza. It is intended for use by primary care clinicians, obstetricians, emergency medicine providers, hospitalists, laboratorians, and infectious disease specialists, as well as other clinicians managing patients with suspected or laboratory-confirmed influenza. The guidelines consider the care of children and adults, including special populations such as pregnant and postpartum women and immunocompromised patients.

Transmission routes of respiratory viruses among humans

Respiratory tract infections can be caused by a wide variety of viruses. Airborne transmission via droplets and aerosols enables some of these viruses to spread efficiently among humans, causing outbreaks that are difficult to control. Many outbreaks have been investigated retrospectively to study the possible routes of inter-human virus transmission. The results of these studies are often inconclusive and at the same time data from controlled experiments is sparse. Therefore, fundamental knowledge on transmission routes that could be used to improve intervention strategies is still missing. We here present an overview of the available data from experimental and observational studies on the transmission routes of respiratory viruses between humans, identify knowledge gaps, and discuss how the available knowledge is currently implemented in isolation guidelines in health care settings.

Intake of 25-Hydroxyvitamin D3 Reduces Duration and Severity of Upper Respiratory Tract Infection: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Parallel Group Comparison Study

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to assess the effect of 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 (25OHD) which is a hydroxide of vitamin D3 ingestion on upper respiratory tract infection (URTI).

DESIGN AND SETTING

A prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was performed from December 2015 to September 2016 in the Nihonbashi Egawa Clinic, Kei Medical Office TOC Building Medical Clinic, and Medical Corporation Kaiseikai Kita-Shinyokohama Medical Clinic, in Japan.

PARTICIPANTS

Four hundred twenty eight participants aged 45-74 years were screened by their serum 25-hydoroxyvitamin D concentration.

INTERVENTION

The participants were randomized to either 25OHD (10 μg/day) or placebo capsule, daily, for 16 consecutive weeks.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome measure was the incidence proportion of URTI, and the secondary outcome measures were the physical severity score, the quality-of-life (QOL) score, the duration of URTI, and the incidence proportion of new URTI events every four weeks. Data were collected using cold diary Wisconsin Upper Respiratory Symptom Survey-21 (WURSS-21) during the intervention.

RESULTS

Of 428 participants screened, 252 with serum 25-hydroxyvitamn D levels were deficient or insufficient (75 nmol/L or less) were enrolled in this study. Of these, 105 placebo and 110 25OHD group subjects completed the study. For the incidence proportion of URTI, no effect of 25OHD intake was observed. On the other hand, the duration of URTI was shorter in the 25OHD (P = 0.061) compared to placebo. For the incidence proportion of URTI every four weeks, the incidence of new URTI was decreased in both groups over the time of intake. However, when the 25OHD and the placebo were compared, a decrease in the incidence proportion of URTI was seen earlier in the 25OHD. When the total physical severity score and the total QOL score during the study were assessed, they both were significantly improved in the 25OHD compared to placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

The intake of 25OHD may reduce the duration of URTI, the physical severity, and the QOL when suffering from URTI.

Randomized controlled trials for influenza drugs and vaccines: a review of controlled human infection studies

OBJECTIVES

Controlled human infection, the intentional infection of healthy volunteers, allows disease pathogenesis to be studied and vaccines and therapeutic interventions to be evaluated in a controlled setting. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials of countermeasures for influenza that used the experimental human infection platform was performed. The primary objective was to document the scope of trials performed to date and the main efficacy outcome in the trials. The secondary objective was to assess safety and identify serious adverse events.

METHODS

The PubMed database was searched for randomized controlled influenza human challenge studies with predetermined search terms. Review papers, papers without outcomes, community-acquired infections, duplicated data, pathogenesis studies, and observational studies were excluded.

RESULTS

Twenty-six randomized controlled trials published between 1947 and 2014 fit the study inclusion criteria. Two-thirds of these trials investigated antivirals and one-third investigated influenza vaccines. Among 2462 subjects inoculated with influenza virus, the incidence of serious adverse events was low (0.04%). These challenge studies helped to down-select three antivirals and one vaccine that were subsequently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

CONCLUSIONS

Controlled human infection studies are an important research tool in assessing promising influenza vaccines and antivirals. These studies are performed quickly and are cost-effective and safe, with a low incidence of serious adverse events.

Microstructure of atmospheric particles revealed by TXM and a new mode of influenza virus transmission

For control of influenza, firstly it is important to find the real virus transmission media. Atmospheric aerosol particles are presumably one of the media. In this study, three typical atmospheric inhaled particles in Shanghai were studied by the synchrotron based transmission X-ray microscopes (TXM). Three dimensional microstructure of the particles reveals that there are many pores contained in, particularly the coal combustion fly particles which may be possible virus carrier. The particles can transport over long distance and cause long-range infections due to its light weight. We suggest a mode which is droplet combining with aerosol mode. By this mode the transmission of global and pandemic influenzas and infection between inland avian far from population and poultry or human living in cities along coast may be explained.

The Intranasal Application of Zanamivir and Carrageenan Is Synergistically Active against Influenza A Virus in the Murine Model

BACKGROUND

Carrageenan is a clinically proven and marketed compound for the treatment of viral upper respiratory tract infections. As infections caused by influenza virus are often accompanied by infections with other respiratory viruses the combination of a specific anti-influenza compound with the broadly active antiviral polymer has huge potential for the treatment of respiratory infections. Thus, the combination of the specific anti-influenza drug Zanamivir together with carrageenan in a formulation suitable for intranasal application was evaluated in-vitro and in-vivo.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

We show in-vitro that carrageenan and Zanamivir act synergistically against several influenza A virus strains (H1N1(09)pdm, H3N2, H5N1, H7N7). Moreover, we demonstrate in a lethal influenza model with a low pathogenic H7N7 virus (HA closely related to the avian influenza A(H7N9) virus) and a H1N1(09)pdm influenza virus in C57BL/6 mice that the combined use of both compounds significantly increases survival of infected animals in comparison with both mono-therapies or placebo. Remarkably, this benefit is maintained even when the treatment starts up to 72 hours post infection.

CONCLUSION

A nasal spray containing carrageenan and Zanamivir should therefore be tested for prevention and treatment of uncomplicated influenza in clinical trials.

Use of neuraminidase inhibitors for rapid containment of influenza: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual and household transmission studies

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of neuraminidase inhibitors for use in rapid containment of influenza.

METHOD

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance with the PRISMA statement. Healthcare databases and sources of grey literature were searched up to 2012 and records screened against protocol eligibility criteria. Data extraction and risk of bias assessments were performed using a piloted form. Results were synthesised narratively and we undertook meta-analyses to calculate pooled estimates of effect, statistical heterogeneity and assessed publication bias.

FINDINGS

Nine randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and eight observational studies met the inclusion criteria. Neuraminidase inhibitors provided 67 to 89% protection for individuals following prophylaxis. Meta-analysis of individual protection showed a significantly lower pooled odds of laboratory confirmed seasonal or influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 infection following oseltamivir usage compared to placebo or no therapy (n = 8 studies; odds ratio (OR) = 0.11; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.06 to 0.20; p<0.001; I2 = 58.7%). This result was comparable to the pooled odds ratio for individual protection with zanamivir (OR = 0.23; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.35). Similar point estimates were obtained with widely overlapping 95% CIs for household protection with oseltamivir or zanamivir. We found no studies of neuraminidase inhibitors to prevent population-wide community transmission of influenza.

CONCLUSION

Oseltamivir and zanamivir are effective for prophylaxis of individuals and households irrespective of treatment of the index case. There are no data which directly support an effect on wider community transmission.

PROTOCOL REGISTRY

PROSPERO registration number: CRD42013003880.

Effects of green tea gargling on the prevention of influenza infection in high school students: a randomized controlled study

Background

The anti-influenza virus activity of green tea catechins has been demonstrated in experimental studies, but clinical evidence has been inconclusive. School-aged children play an important role in the infection and spread of influenza in the form of school-based outbreaks. Preventing influenza infection among students is essential for reducing the frequency of epidemics and pandemics. As a non-pharmaceutical intervention against infection, gargling is also commonly performed in Asian countries but has not yet been extensively studied.

Methods and Findings

A randomized, open label, 2-group parallel study of 757 high school students (15 to 17 years of age) was conducted for 90 days during the influenza epidemic season from December 1st, 2011 to February 28th, 2012, in 6 high schools in Shizuoka Prefecture, Japan. The green tea gargling group gargled 3 times a day with bottled green tea, and the water gargling group did the same with tap water. The water group was restricted from gargling with green tea. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza using immunochromatographic assay for antigen detection. 757 participants were enrolled and 747 participants completed the study (384 in the green tea group and 363 in the water group). Multivariate logistic regression indicated no significant difference in the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza between the green tea group (19 participants; 4.9%) and the water group (25 participants; 6.9%) (adjusted OR, 0.69; 95%CI, 0.37 to 1.28; P = 0.24). The main limitation of the study is the adherence rate among high school students was lower than expected.

Conclusions

Among high school students, gargling with green tea three times a day was not significantly more efficacious than gargling with water for the prevention of influenza infection. In order to adequately assess the effectiveness of such gargling, additional large-scale randomized studies are needed.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01225770

The value of neuraminidase inhibitors for the prevention and treatment of seasonal influenza: a systematic review of systematic reviews

Controversy has arisen regarding the effectiveness of neuraminidase inhibitors (NIs), especially against influenza-related complications. A literature search was performed to critically assess the evidence collected by the available systematic reviews (SRs) regarding the benefits and disadvantages of NIs (oseltamivir, zanamivir) compared to placebos in healthy and at-risk individuals of all ages for prophylaxis and treatment of seasonal influenza. A SR was done using the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Health Technology Assessment Database, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, and Medline (January 2006-July 2012). Two reviewers selected SRs based on randomized clinical trials, which were restricted to intention-to-treat results, and they assessed review (AMSTAR) and study quality indicators (GRADE). The SRs included (N = 9) were of high quality. The efficacy of NIs in prophylaxis ranged from 64% (16-85) to 92% (37-99); the absolute risk reduction ranged from 1.2% to 12.1% (GRADE moderate to low). Clinically relevant treatment benefits of NIs were small in healthy adults and children suffering from influenza-like illness (GRADE high to moderate). Oseltamivir reduced antibiotic usage in healthy adults according to one SR, but this was not confirmed by other reviews (GRADE low). Zanamivir showed a preventive effect on antibiotic usage in children (95% (77-99);GRADE moderate) and on the occurrence of bronchitis in at-risk individuals (59% (30-76);GRADE moderate). No evidence was available on the treatment benefits of NIs in elderly and at-risk groups and their effects on hospitalization and mortality. In oseltamivir trials, nausea, vomiting and diarrhea were significant side-effects. For zanamivir trials, no adverse effects have been reported. The combination of diagnostic uncertainty, the risk for virus strain resistance, possible side effects and financial cost outweigh the small benefits of oseltamivir or zanamivir for the prophylaxis and treatment of healthy individuals. No relevant benefits of these NIs on complications in at-risk individuals have been established.

Neuraminidase inhibitors for preventing and treating influenza in healthy adults and children

BACKGROUND

Planning for outbreaks of influenza is a high priority public health issue for national governments. Neuraminidase inhibitors (NIs) are thought to help reduce the symptoms of influenza with several possible mechanisms proposed. NIs have been stockpiled with a view to their widespread use in the event of a pandemic. However, the evidence base for this class of agents remains a source of debate. In a previous review we have documented substantial risks of publication bias of trials of NIs for influenza (60% of patient data from phase III treatment trials of oseltamivir have never been published) and reporting bias in the published trials. Our confidence in the conclusions of previous versions of this review has been subsequently undermined. Since we have become aware of a large number of unpublished trials of NIs in the management of influenza, this review updates and merges existing reviews in this area.

OBJECTIVES

To review clinical study reports of placebo-controlled randomised trials, regulatory comments and reviews ('regulatory information') of the effects of the NIs oseltamivir and zanamivir for influenza in all age groups and appraise trial programmes, rather than single studies.Clinical study reports are very detailed, unpublished clinical trial data containing in-depth descriptions of protocol rationale, methods analysis plans, trial results and organisational documents (such as contracts). A series of clinical studies designed and conducted by one sponsor represents a trial programme of a drug indication (for example treatment of influenza).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched trial registries, cross-referencing published and unpublished sources and corresponded with manufacturers and regulators. We searched the archives of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European and Japanese regulators. The evidence in this review reflects searches to obtain relevant information up to 12 April 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included regulatory information based on assessments of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in people of any age who had either confirmed or suspected influenza, or who had been exposed to influenza in the local community or place of residence. We included information which had been made available by our deadline.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We indexed regulatory information in two purpose-built instruments and reconstructed trials using CONSORT statement-based templates. To progress to Stage 2 (full analysis) we sought manufacturer explanations of discrepancies in the data. GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) offered us individual patient data and responded to our queries, but Roche did not provide us with complete clinical study reports. In Stage 2 we intended to analyse trials with validated data (i.e. assuming our validation questions aimed at clarifying omissions and discrepancies were resolved). No studies progressed to Stage 2. We carried out analyses of the effects of oseltamivir on time to first alleviation of symptoms and hospitalisations using the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and tested five hypotheses generated post-protocol publication.

MAIN RESULTS

We included and analysed data from 25 studies (15 oseltamivir and 10 zanamivir studies). We could not use data from a further 42 studies due to insufficient information or unresolved discrepancies in their data. The included trials were predominantly conducted in adults during influenza seasons in both hemispheres. A small number of studies were conducted in older people residing in care homes and in people with underlying respiratory diseases. The studies had adequate randomisation and blinding procedures, but imbalances in the analysis populations available (ITT influenza-infected) left many of the studies at risk of attrition bias. All the studies were sponsored by manufacturers of NIs. Time to first alleviation of symptoms in people with influenza-like illness symptoms (i.e. ITT population) was a median of 160 hours (range 125 to 192 hours) in the placebo groups and oseltamivir shortened this by around 21 hours (95% confidence interval (CI) -29.5 to -12.9 hours, P < 0.001; five studies) but there was no evidence of effect on hospitalisations based on seven studies with a median placebo group event rate of 0.84% (range 0% to 11%): odds ratio (OR) 0.95; 95% CI 0.57 to 1.61, P = 0.86). These results are based on the comprehensive ITT population data and are unlikely to be biased. A post-protocol analysis showed that participants randomised to oseltamivir in treatment trials had a reduced odds being diagnosed with influenza (OR 0.83; 95% CI 0.73 to 0.94, P = 0.003; eight studies), probably due to an altered antibody response. Zanamivir trials showed no evidence of this. Due to limitations in the design, conduct and reporting of the trial programme, the data available to us lacked sufficient detail to credibly assess a possible effect of oseltamivir on complications and viral transmission. We postponed analysis of zanamivir evidence because of the offer of individual patient data (IPD) from its manufacturer. The authors have been unable to obtain the full set of clinical study reports or obtain verification of data from the manufacturer of oseltamivir (Roche) despite five requests between June 2010 and February 2011. No substantial comments were made by Roche on the protocol of our Cochrane Review which has been publicly available since December 2010.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found a high risk of publication and reporting biases in the trial programme of oseltamivir. Sub-population analyses of the influenza infected population in the oseltamivir trial programme are not possible because the two arms are non-comparable due to oseltamivir's apparent interference with antibody production. The evidence supports a direct oseltamivir mechanism of action on symptoms but we are unable to draw conclusions about its effect on complications or transmission. We expect full clinical study reports containing study protocol, reporting analysis plan, statistical analysis plan and individual patient data to clarify outstanding issues. These full clinical study reports are at present unavailable to us.

Potential role of human challenge studies for investigation of influenza transmission

The importance of different routes of influenza transmission (including the role of bioaerosols) and the ability of masks and hand hygiene to prevent transmission remain poorly understood. Interest in transmission of influenza has grown as the effectiveness of prevention measures implemented during the 2009 H1N1 pandemic are questioned and as plans to better prepare for the next pandemic are debated. Recent studies of naturally infected patients have encountered difficulties and have fallen short of providing definitive answers. Human challenge studies with influenza virus date back to the 1918 pandemic. In more recent decades they have been undertaken to investigate the efficacy of antiviral agents and vaccines. Could experimental challenge studies, in which volunteers are deliberately infected with influenza virus, provide an alternative approach to the study of transmission? Here, we review the latest intervention studies and discuss the potential of challenge studies to address the remaining gaps in our knowledge.

Neuraminidase inhibitors for preventing and treating influenza in healthy adults

BACKGROUND

Neuraminidase inhibitors (NI) are recommended for use against influenza and its complications in inter-pandemic years and during pandemics.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of NIs in preventing and treating influenza, its transmission, and its complications in otherwise healthy adults, and to estimate the frequency of adverse effects.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2009, issue 3) which contains the Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Specialised Register, MEDLINE (1950 to August 2009) and EMBASE (1980 to August 2009).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-randomised placebo-controlled trials of NIs in healthy adults exposed to naturally occurring influenza.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently applied inclusion criteria, assessed trial quality, and extracted data. We structured the comparisons into prophylaxis, treatment, and adverse events, with further subdivision by outcome and dose.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified four prophylaxis, 12 treatment and four post-exposure prophylaxis trials. In prophylaxis compared to placebo, NIs had no effect against influenza-like illnesses (ILI) (risk ratio (RR) ranging from 1.28 for oral oseltamivir 75 mg daily to 0.76 for inhaled zanamivir 10 mg daily). The efficacy of oral oseltamivir against symptomatic influenza was 76% (at 75 mg daily), and 73% (at 150 mg daily). Inhaled zanamivir 10 mg daily performed similarly. Neither NI had a significant effect on asymptomatic influenza. Oseltamivir induced nausea (odds ratio (OR) 1.79, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.93). Oseltamivir for post-exposure prophylaxis had an efficacy of 58% and 84% in two trials for households. Zanamivir performed similarly. The hazard ratios for time to alleviation of symptoms were in favour of the treated group 1.20 (1.06 to 1.35) for oseltamivir and 1.24 (1.13 to 1.36) for zanamivir. Because of the exclusion of a review of mainly unpublished trials of oseltamivir, insufficient evidence remained to reach a conclusion on the prevention of complications requiring antibiotics in influenza cases (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.37). Analysis of the US FDA and Japan's PMDA regulators' pharmacovigilance dataset, revealed incomplete reporting and description of harms preventing us from reaching firm conclusions on the central nervous system toxicity of neuraminidase inhibitors.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Numerous inconsistencies detected in the available evidence, followed by an inability to adequately access the data, has undermined confidence in our previous conclusions for oseltamivir. Independent RCTs to resolve these uncertainties are needed.

Neuraminidase inhibitors for preventing and treating influenza in healthy adults: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To update a 2005 Cochrane review that assessed the effects of neuraminidase inhibitors in preventing or ameliorating the symptoms of influenza, the transmission of influenza, and complications from influenza in healthy adults, and to estimate the frequency of adverse effects. Search strategy An updated search of the Cochrane central register of controlled trials (Cochrane Library 2009, issue 2), which contains the Acute Respiratory Infections Group's specialised register, Medline (1950-Aug 2009), Embase (1980-Aug 2009), and post-marketing pharmacovigilance data and comparative safety cohorts. Selection criteria Randomised placebo controlled studies of neuraminidase inhibitors in otherwise healthy adults exposed to naturally occurring influenza.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Duration and incidence of symptoms; incidence of lower respiratory tract infections, or their proxies; and adverse events.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two reviewers applied inclusion criteria, assessed trial quality, and extracted data. Data analysis Comparisons were structured into prophylaxis, treatment, and adverse events, with further subdivision by outcome and dose.

RESULTS

20 trials were included: four on prophylaxis, 12 on treatment, and four on postexposure prophylaxis. For prophylaxis, neuraminidase inhibitors had no effect against influenza-like illness or asymptomatic influenza. The efficacy of oral oseltamivir against symptomatic laboratory confirmed influenza was 61% (risk ratio 0.39, 95% confidence interval 0.18 to 0.85) at 75 mg daily and 73% (0.27, 0.11 to 0.67) at 150 mg daily. Inhaled zanamivir 10 mg daily was 62% efficacious (0.38, 0.17 to 0.85). Oseltamivir for postexposure prophylaxis had an efficacy of 58% (95% confidence interval 15% to 79%) and 84% (49% to 95%) in two trials of households. Zanamivir performed similarly. The hazard ratios for time to alleviation of influenza-like illness symptoms were in favour of treatment: 1.20 (95% confidence interval 1.06 to 1.35) for oseltamivir and 1.24 (1.13 to 1.36) for zanamivir. Eight unpublished studies on complications were ineligible and therefore excluded. The remaining evidence suggests oseltamivir did not reduce influenza related lower respiratory tract complications (risk ratio 0.55, 95% confidence interval 0.22 to 1.35). From trial evidence, oseltamivir induced nausea (odds ratio 1.79, 95% confidence interval 1.10 to 2.93). Evidence of rarer adverse events from pharmacovigilance was of poor quality or possibly under-reported.

CONCLUSION

Neuraminidase inhibitors have modest effectiveness against the symptoms of influenza in otherwise healthy adults. The drugs are effective postexposure against laboratory confirmed influenza, but this is a small component of influenza-like illness, so for this outcome neuraminidase inhibitors are not effective. Neuraminidase inhibitors might be regarded as optional for reducing the symptoms of seasonal influenza. Paucity of good data has undermined previous findings for oseltamivir's prevention of complications from influenza. Independent randomised trials to resolve these uncertainties are needed.

Quantifying the routes of transmission for pandemic influenza

Motivated by the desire to assess nonpharmaceutical interventions for pandemic influenza, we seek in this study to quantify the routes of transmission for this disease. We construct a mathematical model of aerosol (i.e., droplet-nuclei) and contact transmission of influenza within a household containing one infected. An analysis of this model in conjunction with influenza and rhinovirus data suggests that aerosol transmission is far more dominant than contact transmission for influenza. We also consider a separate model of a close expiratory event, and find that a close cough is unlikely ( approximately 1% probability) to generate traditional droplet transmission (i.e., direct deposition on the mucous membranes), although a close, unprotected and horizontally-directed sneeze is potent enough to cause droplet transmission. There are insufficient data on the frequency of close expiratory events to assess the relative importance of aerosol transmission and droplet transmission, and it is prudent to leave open the possibility that droplet transmission is important until proven otherwise. However, the rarity of close, unprotected and horizontally-directed sneezes-coupled with the evidence of significant aerosol and contact transmission for rhinovirus and our comparison of hazard rates for rhinovirus and influenza-leads us to suspect that aerosol transmission is the dominant mode of transmission for influenza.

Review of aerosol transmission of influenza A virus

In theory, influenza viruses can be transmitted through aerosols, large droplets, or direct contact with secretions (or fomites). These 3 modes are not mutually exclusive. Published findings that support the occurrence of aerosol transmission were reviewed to assess the importance of this mode of transmission. Published evidence indicates that aerosol transmission of influenza can be an important mode of transmission, which has obvious implications for pandemic influenza planning and in particular for recommendations about the use of N95 respirators as part of personal protective equipment.

Pandemics, avian influenza A (H5N1), and a strategy for pharmacists

Epidemics of influenza occur annually and account for more morbidity in the developed world than all other respiratory diseases combined. On average, 36,000 Americans die from influenza or its complications each year. Pandemics occur when influenza viruses undergo either antigenic drift or antigenic shift that results in a new viral strain that infects humans, when they are capable of sustained transmission from person-to-person, and when they are introduced in populations with little or no preexisting immunity. The influenza pandemic of 1918 caused an estimated 20-40 million deaths worldwide. An avian influenza A (H5N1) virus, currently circulating in Asia, has pandemic potential. However, no evidence currently exists that a pandemic is occurring. Pharmacists are uniquely positioned to initiate nearterm practice changes that may positively impact both seasonal and potential pandemic morbidity and mortality. Pharmacists must be immunization advocates and provide pharmaceutical care that includes evaluation of immunization status. Increasing immunization to prevent invasive pneumococcal disease, as well as seasonal influenza immunization, is encouraged. A pandemic vaccine represents the most effective strategy to mitigate the effects of a pandemic. Antiviral agents represent a treatment bridge until a pandemic-specific vaccine is available. The neuraminidase inhibitors oseltamivir and zanamivir are active against H5N1, although oseltamivir resistance has been reported. Advances in vaccine research, development, and production through the use of reverse-genetics systems represent the most effective technology to rapidly produce a pandemic influenza vaccine.

Neuraminidase inhibitors for preventing and treating influenza in healthy adults

BACKGROUND

Neuraminidase inhibitors (NI) are recommended for use against influenza and its complications in interpandemic years and in a pandemic.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of NIs in preventing or ameliorating influenza, its transmission and its complications in healthy adults and to estimate the frequency of adverse effects.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2005), MEDLINE (2004 to September, Week 4 2005), EMBASE (2003 to June 2005) and contacted manufacturers, researchers in the field, and authors of studies evaluated in the review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised placebo-controlled studies of NIs in healthy adults exposed to naturally occurring influenza.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors applied inclusion criteria, assessed trial quality and extracted data. We structured the comparisons into prophylaxis, treatment and adverse events with further subdivision by outcome and dose.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified four prophylaxis, 13 treatment and four post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) trials. In prophylaxis compared to placebo, NIs have no effect against influenza-like illnesses (ILI) (relative risk (RR) 1.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45 to 3.66 for oral oseltamivir 75 mg daily; RR 1.51, 95% CI 0.77 to 2.95 for inhaled zanamivir 10 mg daily). The efficacy of oral oseltamivir 75 mg daily against symptomatic influenza is 61% (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.85), or 73% (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.67) at 150 mg daily. Inhaled zanamivir 10 mg daily is 62% efficacious (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.85). Neither NI has a significant effect on asymptomatic influenza. Oseltamivir induces nausea (odds ratio (OR) 1.79, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.93). Oseltamivir for PEP has an efficacy of 58.5% (15.6% to 79.6) for households and of 68% (34.9 to 84.2%) to 89% in contacts of index cases. Zanamivir has similar performance. The hazard ratios for time to alleviation of influenza symptoms were in favour of the treated group 1.33 (1.29 to 1.37) for zanamivir and 1.30 (1.13 to 1.50) for oseltamivir. Viral nasal titres were significantly diminished by both NIs. Oseltamivir 150 mg daily prevented lower respiratory tract complications (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.57). We could find no comparative data on the effects of oseltamivir on avian influenza.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Because of their low effectiveness, NIs should not be used in routine seasonal influenza control. In a serious epidemic or pandemic, NIs should be used with other public health measures. We are unsure of the generalisability of our conclusions from seasonal to pandemic or avian influenza.

Antivirals for influenza: historical perspectives and lessons learned

The development of the currently available classes of antivirals, the M2 proton channel inhibitors and the neuraminidase inhibitors, provides valuable perspectives relevant to the field of antiviral chemotherapy in general and insights into aspects of viral pathogenesis and antiviral resistance relevant specifically to influenza. The efficacy observed with these antiviral drugs has proven the importance of these antiviral targets, as well as the principle that chemoprophylaxis and early treatment are possible in influenza infections with small molecular weight inhibitors.

Antivirals for influenza in healthy adults: systematic review

BACKGROUND

Use of antivirals is recommended for the control of seasonal and pandemic influenza. Our aim was to review the evidence of efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of registered antivirals against naturally occurring influenza in healthy adults.

METHODS

We searched various Databases to October, 2005, and contacted manufacturers and corresponding authors. We included randomised controlled trials comparing prophylactic (n=27) or treatment (n=27) efficacy against symptomatic or asymptomatic influenza. We did a meta-analysis and expressed prophylactic efficacy as a proportion (1-relative risk [RR]). For treatment trials, because of inconsistent and non-standardised reporting, we expressed continuous outcomes either as means or as hazard ratios.

FINDINGS

We included 51 reports of 52 randomised controlled trials. Amantadine prevented 61% (95% CI 35-76) of influenza A cases and 25% (13-36) of cases of influenza-like illness, but caused nausea (OR 2.56, 1.37-4.79), insomnia and hallucinations (2.54, 1.50-4.31), and withdrawals because of adverse events (2.54, 1.60-4.06). There was no effect on asymptomatic cases (RR 0.85, 0.40-1.80). In treatment, amantadine significantly shortened duration of fever compared with placebo (by 0.99 days, -1.26 to -0.71), but had no effect on nasal shedding of influenza A viruses (0.93, 0.71-1.21). The fewer data for rimantadine showed comparable effects. In prophylaxis, compared with placebo, neuraminidase inhibitors have no effect against influenza-like illness (1.28, 0.45-3.66 for oral oseltamivir 75 mg daily, 1.51, 0.77-2.95 for inhaled zanamivir 10 mg daily). Higher doses appear to make no difference. The efficacy of oral oseltamivir 75 mg daily against symptomatic influenza is 61% (15-82), or 73% (33-89) at 150 mg daily. Inhaled zanamivir 10 mg daily is 62% efficacious (15-83). Neither neuraminidase inhibitor appeared effective against asymptomatic influenza. Oseltamivir induces nausea (OR 1.79, 1.10-2.93), especially at higher prophylactic doses (2.29, 1.34-3.92). Oseltamivir in a post-exposure prophylaxis role has a protective efficacy of 58.5% (15.6-79.6) for households and from 68% (34.9-84.2) to 89% (67-97) in contacts of index cases. In influenza cases, compared with placebo the hazard ratios for time to alleviation of symptoms were 1.33, 1.29-1.37 for zanamivir; 1.30, 1.13-1.50 for oseltamivir provided medication was started within 48 h of symptom onset. Viral nasal titres were significantly diminished by both drugs (weighted mean difference -0.62, -0.82 to -0.41). Oseltamivir at 150 mg daily was effective in preventing lower respiratory tract complications in influenza cases (OR 0.32, 0.18-0.57). We could find no credible data on the effects of oseltamivir on avian influenza.

INTERPRETATION

The use of amantadine and rimantadine should be discouraged. Because of their low effectiveness, neuraminidase inhibitors should not be used in seasonal influenza control and should only be used in a serious epidemic or pandemic alongside other public-health measures.

Antiviral therapies in children: has their time arrived?

The increase in the number and classes of antiviral agents that has occurred since the 1980s is remarkable. The rapid expansion in therapeutic options for previously untreatable illnesses challenges clinicians to gain familiarity and experience with these new drugs, especially with regard to their use in children. This article describes the clinical utilities, pharmacokinetics, and adverse effects of these new drugs to empower practitioners to use them appropriately.

Vaccination versus treatment of influenza in working adults: a cost-effectiveness analysis

PURPOSE

To determine the cost-effectiveness of influenza vaccination, antiviral therapy, or no intervention for healthy working adults, accounting for annual variation in vaccine efficacy.

METHODS

We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis based on published clinical trials of influenza vaccine and antiviral drugs, incorporating 10 years of surveillance data from the World Health Organization. We modeled influenza vaccination, treatment of influenza-like illness with antiviral drugs, or both, as compared with no intervention, targeting healthy working adults under age 50 years in the general community or workplace. Outcomes included costs, illness days, and quality-adjusted days gained.

RESULTS

In the base case analysis, the majority of costs incurred for all strategies were related to lost productivity from influenza illness. The least expensive strategy varied from year to year. For the 10-year period, antiviral therapy without vaccination was associated with the lowest overall costs (234 US dollars per person per year). Annual vaccination cost was 239 US dollars per person, and was associated with 0.0409 quality-adjusted days saved, for a marginal cost-effectiveness ratio of 113 US dollars per quality-adjusted day gained or 41,000 US dollars per quality-adjusted life-year saved compared with antiviral therapy. No intervention was the most expensive and least effective option. In sensitivity analyses, lower vaccination costs, higher annual probabilities of influenza, and higher numbers of workdays lost to influenza made vaccination more cost-effective than treatment. If vaccination cost was less than 16 US dollars or time lost from work exceeded 2.4 days per episode of influenza, then vaccination was cost saving compared with all other strategies.

CONCLUSION

Influenza vaccination for healthy working adults is reasonable economically, and under certain circumstances is cost saving. Antiviral therapy is consistently cost saving.

Prevention of influenza in the general population

BACKGROUND

Although all jurisdictions in Canada offer annual influenza immunization to people at high risk of complications, only Ontario has provided universal annual immunization of healthy adults and children. Use of chemotherapy (amantidine, neuraminidase inhibitors) to prevent influenza varies among provinces. We sought to systematically review the evidence for the prevention of influenza infection in the general population.

METHODS

The interventions reviewed were influenza vaccination and prophylactic use of neuraminidase inhibitors. The health outcomes of interest were rates of laboratory-confirmed influenza infection, clinical definitions of influenza-like illness and work absenteeism. MEDLINE and Cochrane databases were searched for relevant articles published between 1966 and March 2003. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were selected. Evidence was appraised using the methodology of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care.

RESULTS

Eighteen trials involving more than 33,000 healthy adults were identified that met the inclusion criteria; of these, 15 showed that influenza vaccination with either live-attenuated and inactivated vaccines was efficacious. Eleven trials were considered to be of "good" quality, and 7 were considered to be of "fair" quality. The relative risk reduction (RRR) associated with influenza immunization in adults ranged from 0% to 91%. Fifteen RCTs involving more than 45,000 healthy children aged 6 months to 19 years were identified, of which 9 were considered to contain "good" evidence and 6 "fair" evidence. Results from 12 of these trials showed protection against influenza. The RRR ranged from 0% to 93%. There were 6 RCTs of "good" quality showing that neuraminidase inhibitors are effective in preventing influenza infection. Side effects from both influenza vaccination and neuraminidase inhibitor administration were mild.

INTERPRETATION

There are numerous RCTs of good quality in large populations that have consistently shown that influenza vaccination, using inactivated or live-attenuated vaccines, is moderately effective in preventing influenza in the general population (healthy adults and children over 6 months of age). There is good evidence that neuraminidase inhibitor prophylaxis in contacts given within 36 to 48 hours of symptom onset of the household index case is effective; appropriate use of this prevention method requires access to rapid diagnostic methods. Decisions about introduction of routine immunization programs must take into account the cost and cost-effectiveness of a universal program and the burden of illness associated with influenza in each jurisdiction.

Influenza

Although most influenza infections are self-limited, few other diseases exert such a huge toll of suffering and economic loss. Despite the importance of influenza, there had been, until recently, little advance in its control since amantadine was licensed almost 40 years ago. During the past decade, evidence has accrued on the protection afforded by inactivated vaccines and the safety and efficacy in children of live influenza-virus vaccines. There have been many new developments in vaccine technology. Moreover, work on viral neuraminidase has led to the licensing of potent selective antiviral drugs, and economic decision modelling provides further justification for annual vaccination and a framework for the use of neuraminidase inhibitors. Progress has also been made on developing near-patient testing for influenza that may assist individual diagnosis or the recognition of widespread virus circulation, and so optimise clinical management. Despite these advances, the occurrence of avian H5N1, H9N2, and H7N7 influenza in human beings and the rapid global spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome are reminders of our vulnerability to an emerging pandemic. The contrast between recent cases of H5N1 infection, associated with high mortality, and the typically mild, self-limiting nature of human infections with avian H7N7 and H9N2 influenza shows the gaps in our understanding of molecular correlates of pathogenicity and underlines the need for continuing international research into pandemic influenza. Improvements in animal and human surveillance, new approaches to vaccination, and increasing use of vaccines and antiviral drugs to combat annual influenza outbreaks are essential to reduce the global toll of pandemic and interpandemic influenza.

Management of influenza symptoms in healthy adults

OBJECTIVE

To determine the cost-effectiveness of rapid diagnostic testing and empiric antiviral therapy for healthy adults with symptoms of influenza.

DESIGN

Cost-effectiveness analysis using a decision model based on previously published data. Outcome measures included costs and quality-adjusted life expectancy.

SETTING

Physician's office.

PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS

Hypothetically healthy, working adults < 65 years of age presenting with cough and fever during the influenza season.

INTERVENTIONS

Rapid testing or clinical diagnosis followed by treatment with amantadine, rimantadine, oseltamivir, or zanamivir compared with no antiviral therapy.

RESULTS

Base-case analysis: not giving antiviral therapy is the most expensive and least effective strategy, costing 471 dollars per patient, mostly owing to time lost from work. Amantadine treatment increases life expectancy by 0.0014 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) while saving 108 dollars per patient relative to no antiviral therapy. Zanamivir is slightly more effective than amantadine, adding 0.0002 QALYs at an incremental cost of 31 dollars, or 133,000 dollars per QALY saved. All other strategies, including testing strategies, are both less effective and more expensive. SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: The model is sensitive to the probability of influenza infection, proportion of influenza caused by type B, the relative efficacy of the various drugs, and the value of a workday. At a clinical probability of influenza infection > 20%, antiviral therapy is favored. As the proportion of influenza B increases, zanamivir is favored over amantadine. Testing is rarely indicated. Ignoring the costs of lost workdays, amantadine treatment costs 1,200 dollars/QALY saved.

CONCLUSIONS

Antiviral therapy with either amantadine or zanamivir is cost-effective for healthy, young patients with influenza-like illness during the influenza season, depending on the prevalence of influenza B.

Antivirals for influenza: what is their role in the older patient?

Influenza infection is a cause of high morbidity and mortality in the elderly living in the community or in long-term care facilities. Yearly immunisation is the most important means for prevention of infection. However, protection by vaccination in the elderly is incomplete, and influenza infections and outbreaks in long-term care facilities still occur. Symptoms of influenza include fever, chills, headache, myalgia and respiratory symptoms. These clinical features overlap considerably with other co-circulating respiratory viruses such as respiratory syncytial virus and parainfluenza virus. Elderly and debilitated patients with influenza may present with less prominent respiratory symptoms and may present only with fever, lassitude and confusion. Antiviral prophylaxis and treatment with amantadine and rimantadine have been given in the past but adverse effects and early development of drug resistance have limited their use. The newer antivirals zanamivir and oseltamivir are equally effective and have the advantage of being well tolerated and active against both influenza A and B without the development of resistance. However, they are costly. Early identification and diagnosis of influenza illnesses are crucial since treatment with antiviral agents should be started within 48 hours of the beginning of illness.

Neuraminidase inhibitors in pediatric patients: potential place in influenza therapy

Influenza is responsible for annual epidemics, and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The development and use of antiviral agents is one of the recent strategies used to control influenza. Zanamivir and oseltamivir are members of a new class of antiviral agents, the neuraminidase inhibitors, that are effective in the treatment of influenza. These drugs have been evaluated in double-blind, placebo-controlled trials in children. Efficacy was shown by shortened duration of influenza-related symptoms in children treated with neuraminidase inhibitors. Seasonal prophylaxis in adults, and administration to household contacts of influenza-infected persons has decreased the incidence of influenza infection and illness. Adverse effects of zanamivir are minimal, while oseltamivir is associated with gastrointestinal upset, which does not usually require the medication to be ceased. No serious adverse events have been reported in children receiving these medications. Caution should be exercised in the use of zanamivir in children with asthma due to the potential development of bronchospasm and respiratory distress. Development of resistance to these medications is reported to occur less frequently than with amantadine. Resistance to zanamivir has been rarely detected during clinical trials, while up to 5.5% of influenza strains isolated from children after treatment were reported to be resistant to oseltamivir. Due to the role children play in the spread of influenza within the community, use of these medications may help control influenza epidemics.

New millennium antivirals against pandemic and epidemic influenza: the neuraminidase inhibitors

The mushroom shaped outer spike protein of influenza, neuraminidase, was first discovered nearly 60 years ago. Its importance in viral replication was soon recognised both at the point of viral release from the cell and also enabling passage of virus through nasal fluid to reach the cell. The enzyme active site was identified by x-ray crystallography, allowing an atomic study of interaction of enzyme with the sialic acid substrate. Analogues could then be identified and synthesized and became a focused target for antivirals. With the current threat of bioterrorism and the potential for the emergence of a new pandemic strain in the near future, efforts are underway to develop more potent second-generation anti-neuraminidase inhibitors with enhanced protective and therapeutic effects. Here we review older and newer neuraminidase inhibitors and the role that they will play in the fight against influenza in its epidemic and pandemic face.

Economic evaluation of strategies for the control and management of influenza in Europe

We compared the cost-effectiveness of different strategies for the control and management of influenza for the elderly populations in three European countries (England and Wales, France, Germany). A "no intervention" scenario was compared with six control strategies: opportunistic vaccination (passive recruitment), comprehensive vaccination programmes (active recruitment), 4 weeks chemoprophylaxis course using neuraminidase inhibitors (NIs), 4 weeks chemoprophylaxis course using ion-channel inhibitors (ICIs), early treatment with NIs, and early treatment with ICIs. Vaccination strategies were the most cost-effective. Chemoprophylaxis strategies were highly expensive even under assumptions of optimal timing. Early treatment strategies with antivirals substantially increased demand for GP services and were more expensive than prevention through vaccination.

Influenza in the acute hospital setting

Influenza poses special hazards inside healthcare facilities and can cause explosive outbreaks of illness. Healthcare workers are at risk of acquiring influenza and thus serve as an important reservoir for patients under their care. Annual influenza immunisation of high-risk persons and their contacts, including healthcare workers, is the primary means of preventing nosocomial influenza. Despite influenza vaccine effectiveness, it is substantially underused by healthcare providers. Influenza can be diagnosed by culturing the virus from respiratory secretions and by rapid antigen detection kits; recognition of a nosocomial outbreak is important in order to employ infection-control efforts. Optimal control of influenza in the acute-care setting should focus upon reducing potential influenza reservoirs in the hospital, including: isolating patients with suspected or documented influenza, sending home healthcare providers or staff who exhibit typical symptoms of influenza, and discouraging persons with febrile respiratory illness from visiting the hospital during a known influenza outbreak in the community. (Note: influenza and other respiratory viruses can cause non-febrile illness but are still transmissible.) The antiviral M2 protein inhibitors (amantadine, rimantadine) and neuraminidase inhibitors (zanamivir, oseltamivir) have proven efficacy in treating and preventing influenza illness; however, their role in the prevention and control of influenza in the acute hospital setting remains to be more fully studied.

Antiviral therapy for influenza virus infections

Every year, influenza viruses cause global epidemics that result in significant morbidity and mortality. Influenza infections can be serious in children, especially infants and toddlers. Four antiviral agents, amantadine, rimantadine, oseltamivir, and zanamivir, are available for the treatment or prophylaxis of influenza. Experience with the use of these antiviral drugs for influenza in children is limited. Given the small degree of therapeutic gain that is reported from clinical trials, considerations about cost effectiveness are important in deciding whether to use these agents in the treatment of suspected or proven influenza infections in healthy children.

Fatores de risco e medidas profiláticas nas pneumonias adquiridas na comunidade

Este artigo revisa os efeitos do envelhecimento, tabagismo, DPOC, insuficiência cardíaca, colonização da orofaringe, aspiração (micro e macro), alcoolismo, cirrose hepática, deficiência nutricional, imunossupressão e fatores ambientais sobre o risco de adquirir pneumonia na comunidade e sua gravidade. Na segunda parte, é feita revisão sobre a ação profilática das vacinas antiinfluenza e antipneumococo, assim como a ação das drogas antivirais, na profilaxia e tratamento das pneumonias adquiridas na comunidade.

Zanamivir and oseltamivir: two new options for the treatment and prevention of influenza

BACKGROUND

Influenza infection is responsible for thousands of hospitalizations and deaths in the United States each year. Until recently, management options were limited to vaccination or use of the antiviral agents amantadine and rimantadine. Two antiviral drugs, zanamivir and oseltamivir, have recently been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of influenza A and influenza B.

OBJECTIVE

This article reviews the published data on the pharmacology and clinical utility of zanamivir and oseltamivir in the treatment and prevention of influenza A and influenza B illness.

METHODS

To identify relevant literature, a search of MEDLINE, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and the Iowa Drug Information Service was conducted for the period from 1969 to 2000. The search terms used were influenza, neuraminidase, zanamivir, oseltamivir; amantadine, and rimantadine. The reference lists of the articles so obtained were used to identify additional publications.

RESULTS

Zanamivir and oseltamivir inactivate viral neuraminidase, an enzyme responsible for cleaving sialic acid residues on newly formed virions as they bud off from the host cell. This inhibition results in aggregation of virions on the surface of the host cell, which limits the extent of infection and speeds recovery from illness. Clinical studies have shown that neuraminidase inhibitors can decrease the median duration of influenza-related symptoms by approximately 1 day if initiated within 48 hours of the onset of symptoms of influenza.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence supports the use of zanamivir and oseltamivir in the treatment of influenza; however, additional studies are needed to clarify their utility and tolerability in pediatric and high-risk patients, as well as their utility in the prevention of influenza.

Recommendations for the outpatient surveillance of renal transplant recipients. American Society of Transplantation

Many complications after renal transplantation can be prevented if they are detected early. Guidelines have been developed for the prevention of diseases in the general population, but there are no comprehensive guidelines for the prevention of diseases and complications after renal transplantation. Therefore, the Clinical Practice Guidelines Committee of the American Society of Transplantation developed these guidelines to help physicians and other health care workers provide optimal care for renal transplant recipients. The guidelines are also intended to indirectly help patients receive the access to care that they need to ensure long-term allograft survival, by attempting to systematically define what that care encompasses. The guidelines are applicable to all adult and pediatric renal transplant recipients, and they cover the outpatient screening for and prevention of diseases and complications that commonly occur after renal transplantation. They do not cover the diagnosis and treatment of diseases and complications after they become manifest, and they do not cover the pretransplant evaluation of renal transplant candidates. The guidelines are comprehensive, but they do not pretend to cover every aspect of care. As much as possible, the guidelines are evidence-based, and each recommendation has been given a subjective grade to indicate the strength of evidence that supports the recommendation. It is hoped that these guidelines will provide a framework for additional discussion and research that will improve the care of renal transplant recipients.

Prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of influenza: current and future options

Because influenza significantly affects the health of children, this review describes the current and future options for preventing, diagnosing, and treating influenza infections. Currently, the inactivated influenza vaccine is recommended for prevention of influenza; however, the live, attenuated, intranasal influenza vaccine is a potential future option. For diagnosis, viral culture is the gold standard, although four rapid diagnostic tests are available for more immediate results. The impetus for rapid results is the availability of effective antiviral agents indicated for early influenza infection. The four currently approved antiviral agents are amantadine, rimantadine, zanamivir [Relenza, Glaxo Wellcome, Inc., Research Triangle Park, NC] and oseltamivir [Tamiflu, Roche Pharmaceuticals, Nutley, NJ]. The indications, benefits, side effects and ages for which each drug is approved are reviewed.

Neuraminidase inhibitors: zanamivir and oseltamivir

OBJECTIVE

To review the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety of zanamivir and oseltamivir for the prophylaxis and treatment of influenza.

DATA SOURCES

A MEDLINE search restricted to English-language journals was conducted (1980-May 2000).

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

All efficacy and safety trials were included if conducted in humans and published in a journal. Abstracts were included if no other data source was available.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Zanamivir and oseltamivir block influenza neuraminidase and prevent the cleavage of sialic acid residues, thus interfering with progeny virus dispersement within the mucosal secretions and reducing viral infectivity. The neuraminidase trials for prophylaxis and treatment of influenza enrolled predominantly young (mean age 29-37 y), healthy, mostly unvaccinated individuals who were at the lowest risk of influenza and its complications. When zanamivir 10 mg inhaled twice daily or oseltamivir 75 mg orally twice daily were used for treatment, systemic symptoms such as myalgias, fever, and headache were reduced by approximately 0.7-1.5 days. Greater efficacy (symptom reduction by 1.5-2.0 d) was noted in proven cases of influenza infection, in febrile patients, and in patients who received the treatment medication within 30 hours of symptom onset. Clinical efficacy did not increase when doses higher than the treatment dose approved by the Food and Drug Administration were used. When given for prophylaxis, zanamivir 10 mg inhaled once daily or oseltamivir 75 mg orally once daily was used for four to six weeks and achieved protective clinical efficacy for laboratory-confirmed influenza ranging from 67% to 74%, depending on whether culture or serologic tests were performed. The most common adverse effects (usually < 5%) included upper respiratory tract symptoms. Patients with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease who received zanamivir had an increased incidence of a > 20% decline in forced expiratory volume in one second or peak expiratory flow rates. Headaches, nausea, and vomiting were more frequent in the oseltamivir groups than in placebo groups. The most common gastrointestinal adverse effects, nausea and vomiting, were reduced to approximately 10% by administering the medication with food.

CONCLUSIONS

Zanamivir and oseltamivir are more effective in preventing culture-positive influenza or for treatment of culture-positive influenza in febrile (> or = 37.8 degrees C) individuals. Treatment is more effective if initiated within 30 hours of symptom onset in febrile individuals; however, it is difficult to meet these criteria. More realistically, clinical efficacy is closer to 60-70% and, for treatment started within 48 hours for laboratory-confirmed influenza, symptom reduction is approximately 0.7-1.5 days. If used appropriately to minimize the development of resistance, the neuraminidase inhibitors represent a new and unique class of antiinfluenza agents that can potentially reduce the morbidity associated with influenza.

Prophylactic and symptomatic treatment of influenza. Current and developing options

The influenza vaccine is the primary method for the prevention and control of influenza. Anti-influenza drugs also have been shown to be useful prophylactically and to shorten the duration of illness by 1 or 2 days when started within 48 hours of symptom onset. In this article, Dr Mossad discusses indications for the vaccine and compares the relative advantages and disadvantages of each of the anti-influenza drugs.

Influenza virus neuraminidase inhibitors

Neuraminidase promotes influenza virus release from infected cells and facilitates virus spread within the respiratory tract. Several potent and specific inhibitors of this enzyme have been developed, and two (zanamivir and oseltamivir) have been approved for human use. Unlike amantadine and rimantadine that target the M2 protein of influenza A viruses, these drugs inhibit replication of both influenza A and B viruses. Zanamivir is delivered by inhalation because of its low oral bioavailability whereas oseltamivir is administered by mouth. Early treatment with either drug reduces the severity and duration of influenza symptoms and associated complications. Both agents are effective for chemoprophylaxis. Because of a broader antiviral spectrum, better tolerance, and less potential for emergence of resistance than is seen with the M2 inhibitors, the neuraminidase inhibitors represent an important advance in the treatment of influenza.